A federal judge has struck down the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) policy that authorized civil immigration arrests at courthouses, delivering a ruling with nationwide effect.

The decision ends, for now, the practice of making civil immigration arrests inside or at the entrances of courthouses across the country. Under the struck-down policy, ICE officers could arrest individuals they suspected of being removable from the United States at state and local court facilities — locations that many immigrants must visit for hearings, fines, protective orders, and other official business.

The ruling applies across the country, meaning ICE cannot rely on the invalidated policy as a basis for courthouse arrests in any jurisdiction.

Who is affected

The decision directly concerns non-citizens who interact with the court system — defendants, witnesses, victims, and family members attending proceedings. It also binds ICE officers and the field personnel who previously carried out arrests under the policy.

Why the ruling matters

Courthouse arrests had drawn criticism from state and local officials, who argued the practice deterred immigrants from reporting crimes, appearing for court dates, and cooperating with law enforcement. Advocates and several jurisdictions challenged the policy in court, arguing it undermined public safety and access to justice.

The judge's decision marks a significant curtailment of one enforcement tool ICE had used to apprehend individuals in the interior of the United States.

What changes in practice

Following the ruling, ICE may no longer conduct civil immigration arrests at courthouses under the invalidated policy anywhere in the country. The decision does not by itself change other enforcement authorities ICE holds elsewhere; it targets the courthouse arrest policy specifically.

Readers should monitor official announcements from ICE, the Department of Homeland Security, and the issuing court for the full text of the order, its effective terms, and any conditions or carve-outs it contains. The government may also seek to appeal or seek a stay, which could alter how and when the ruling takes practical effect.

What comes next

Litigation over the policy may continue. Parties in the case, and potentially the federal government, retain the option to appeal the decision to a higher court. Until an appellate court says otherwise, the nationwide ruling stands.

Immigrants with pending court matters or immigration concerns should not rely on news summaries alone. Official court documents and guidance from ICE and DHS are the authoritative sources on the scope of the ruling. Individuals seeking case-specific guidance should consult a licensed immigration attorney or accredited representative.

Passport File will continue to track this ruling, any appeal, and subsequent ICE enforcement guidance as they develop.